Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6052644" data-attributes="member: 3192">I gathered that. What I'm saying is that element isn't essential or unavoidable in games with a DM as referee. The player is determining through trial and error what the rules are just like in a videogame or any puzzle game. What I mean is absolutist thinking denies certain possibilities as fundamentally impossible and it's easy to be prejudiced against anything that doesn't fit inside our predetermined conceptions of the world. I'm asking that you open yourself to up other possibilities.And yes, I have both played and run games where everything is covered by either pre-defined mechanics (like a dictionary pre-defines the words we are using) or the incorporation of new elements that fall within the operation of pre-defined play.While elegant in design I would hardly call it basic. Plus, you're still assuming a game system is not the puzzle. The system is run by the DM not necessarily created by him or her. As I mentioned before, like a cartridge and a console the game rules define the operation of play and the puzzle the operation of the DM.Or maybe the game rules he used behind the screen, but I'm not advocating for any specific edition here.. I'm saying game rules and game design itself can successfully be focused on building in wonderment via suspense, anticipation, and rewarding the use of imagination.You can certainly continue to deny or try to limit all of that, but between the two of us all we end up with is you unwilling to conceive of or play games you don't believe are possible.Look, I'm not seeking to change your mind here. If you want to continue to believe with such certainty in whatever set of beliefs you hold, I don't desire to change that. What I'm disagreeing with is that others might not only be holding differing views from your own, but flourishing with them.</blockquote>

Verification